Ridley Scott’s Napoleon (2023) provides a novel dramatization of the European transition to modernity and the realization of the possibility of subjective individuality in new and evolving forms of societal structures. While generally the film was not well received by critics or perhaps begrudgingly acknowledged, Scott’s epic historical drama, written by David Scarpa, provides an innovative perspective on the unfolding of modern European society. Moreover, the performances of Joaquin Phoenix as Napoleon Bonaparte and Vanessa Kirby as Joséphine de Beauharnais provide insights into the emergence and experience of subjectivity and individuality under the long shadow of the Ancien Régime.

Critics have expressed several concerns about the film. One is the film’s historical coherence and accuracy; the film jumps from one event to another without a clear narrative, and some of the historical events are portrayed with questionable accuracy. For example, the film’s depiction of French troops bombarding the Pyramids during Napoleon’s campaign in Egypt has been criticized as an invention. It has been argued that the movie fails to provide meaningful insights into Napoleon as a figure or into the broader context of the French Revolution and its aftermath. Instead, the film reportedly spends a considerable amount of time focusing on Napoleon’s relationship with Joséphine, addressing their sexual issues, jealousies, and her childlessness, which critics feel detracts from the historical narrative.

While conceding that historical films often grapple with the balance between factual accuracy and artistic interpretation, Scott’s Napoleon presents a unique exploration of individual and societal transformations during the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.

This transformation reflects a dramatic shift from collective, class-based identities to a society premised on individuality, agency, and subjectivity. The chaos and terror of the Revolution are a feature—rather than a cause—of this change, challenging old hierarchies and opening the door to a modern society premised on the autonomy of individual decision-making. This historical period is marked by profound upheavals, as traditional structures are dismantled, frequently violently, and ideologies emerge. The film captures the essence of this pivotal moment, illustrating the complex interplay between revolutionary fervour and the birth of modern, individual-centric societal norms.

Sociologist, Niklas Luhmann, offerered an explanation for the emergence of modern society, where stratified societies of the Middle Ages had insufficient flexibility for the increasing complexities that they were confronting. The rise of an economic system marked by the revival of trade routes, marketplaces, and craftsmanship and the advent of an advanced and increasingly global monetary economy challenged the feudal order. This economic differentiation, alongside the development of legal and political systems, introduced new contradictions and challenges, leading to the modern society's complex and functionally differentiated nature.

The emergence of individual subjectivity and agency can be seen within this transformation; the growth of a merchant class increasingly demanded representation and rights. The attempt to create more standardized legal systems marked a significant shift towards a legal framework that recognized individuals as legal subjects. The media system increasingly served as an intermediary between the emerging modern social structures and the increasing role of public opinion. It played a pivotal role in disseminating revolutionary ideas and ideals of the Enlightenment, which underpinned the societal shift towards individualism and secularism. Newspapers, pamphlets, and novels not only informed the public of the political and social changes occurring but also reflected public opinion, attitudes and subjective experience.

The portrayal in the media of Napoleon as a symbol of French greatness and the embodiment of revolutionary ideals contributed to his rise to power. The significance of the representation of Napoleon bombarding the Pyramids reflects a media narrative and while not historically accurate reflects a narrative reality. At the same time, in Scott’s film, Napoleon and his relationship with Joséphine is parodied and satirised by the French media. The English media, in which the Duke of Wellington played by Rupert Everitt is portrayed as something of an ‘influencer’, was also largely responsible for satirizing Bonaparte and his supposed diminutive stature.

The characterization of Napoleon in the film has been criticized for its failure to accurately represent key aspects of his character especially overlooking his tactical genius on the battlefield. This seems to stem from a modern and contemporary need to essentialise talents and genius as individual traits. The representation of Napoleon by Phoenix of an individual who is socially anxious, awkward, self-contained and highly engaged with his own thoughts runs counter to the essence of genius where the talented individual’s behaviour is driven by underlying inherent characteristics.

More orthodox renditions of Napoleon tend to highlight his charisma, his ability to inspire loyalty among his troops, and his hands-on approach to leadership. His determination and resilience in the face of adversity and his ability to make swift decisions under pressure and are often depicted by his decisiveness in moments of crisis, highlighting his resolve and the personal qualities that underpinned his military success.

Scott’s Napoleon is more complex and less obvious. His charisma, decisiveness, innovativeness, and tactical prowess is presented alongside uncertainty, shyness, introversion and fallibility. This contradictory Napoleon no doubt disappoints critics in relation to an orthodox trajectory of representations and mythologies, but also disturbs a more general belief about the modern subjective self and its essential core. Scott not only challenges traditional portrayals of Napoleon but disturbs some core beliefs about nature of the modern individual.

Napoleon is and was a disturbing character, to whom we might relate, as a reflection of the uncertain, discontinuous and contradictory experience of contemporary selfhood from which we futilely and narcissistically seek some absolute essence or core. Scott thus concedes no pathology of Napoleon but can only present a subjectivity that is born from the contingency of physical and social experience where continuity is fleeting, paradoxical, and self-referential. It invites a reconsideration of historical figures like Napoleon, not as monolithic entities, but as subjects whose complexities mirror the uncertain terrain of modern selfhood.

The film prompts further reflection on the identities and subjectivities of Napoleon and Joséphine, as they transcend the birth of the new from the body of the old in the transitions in social structures and social relations. Napoleon, emerging from modest origins to become Emperor of France, and the aristocratic Joséphine, navigating her role within this changing order, illustrating the fluidity and dynamism of social identities during this period of upheaval.

Phoenix’s portrayal of Napoleon confronting the transitions from the Middle Ages to modernity is juxtaposed with Joséphine’s confrontation with the persistent influence of patriarchy. In her dealings with the societal and personal challenges posed by her relationship with Napoleon and her own status, we are prompted to reflect on the complexities faced by women during this period of transition. Her portrayal in the film embodies the shift in women’s roles and identities as society moves from rigid, traditional structures to a new era that begins to acknowledge and grapple with the concept of female agency and individuality.

While a feminist perspective may see a continuity of patriarchy into modernity, where Joséphine is presented as an object for the pleasure, utility and convenience of Napoleon, Kirby’s performance characterises a woman navigating her own subjectivity and agency in a society in transition. Ironically, Joséphine is both her own and others’ (including Napoleon and her lover) object and subject of pleasure and desire under the long shadow of patriarchy. Her life presents complex interplay between being an object of desire and an agent of her own desires.

Both Napoleon and Joséphine wrestle with a new subjectivity within the dynamics of providence and destiny as a feature of the old and agency, subjectivity and autonomy of the new. Napoleon’s struggle with his role and identity, in a time when traditional notions of destiny and divine right are giving way to emerging concepts of individual merit and self-determination, illustrate a broader societal shift. Similarly, Joséphine’s character negotiates her own path within these changing dynamics. Her journey is not just about navigating the patriarchal structures of her time but also about finding her place in a society where the roles and expectations of women are evolving. However, we see with the legacy patriarchal format in the new social world and the continued emphasis on the self-actualisation of the male served by the female.

Napoleon’s approach to intimacy is presented as a complex and tense dynamic of a personal need for closeness, a view of the sexual act as service, and driven by a desire for procreation—for a son and heir. In contrast, Joséphine’s character is portrayed as more sexually liberated with the freedom to engage in a relationship with her lover to fulfill her emotional and sexual needs. This is a recognition of an emergent assertion of female sexual agency and the right to seek personal fulfillment beyond the confines of marital obligations, though challenged and contested.

The tragedy of Napoleon’s life and the excessive losses through conflict and war are within the contradictions of the societal transitions. On one hand, modernity invites the possibility of the individual to assert and substantiate their agency and those of others and progress on merit. On the other hand, as Napoleon ascends to power, he becomes acculturated into the old order and the providence and divinity of his role as Emperor of France. The adoption of such a title and his efforts to establish a dynastic rule marks a regression to the practices of hereditary privilege and autocratic rule, contradicting the revolutionary ideals of liberty, equality, and fraternity.

The contradiction is further highlighted by the immense human cost of Napoleon's military campaigns, which resulted in significant loss of life and suffering. These campaigns can be seen as an extension of the contradiction within Napoleon himself—a striving for greatness and a universal European dominion rooted in Enlightenment ideals yet achieved through methods that reinstated the violence and dominance of the Ancien Régime.

What Scott’s Napoleon invites us to consider in its innovative portrayal of both his and Joséphine’s identities are the inherent contradictions of modern agentic and subjective reality, which Foucault describes as the birth of the subject. This is presented in a historically poignant and violent moment in European history. It emphasises an ongoing contradiction and the crisis-prone nature of modern individuality and individualism. The fundamental crisis of modern individuality lies in the tension between the pursuit of autonomy, self-expression, and personal freedom, and the constraints imposed by societal norms, structures, and the transactional interdependence of individual identity.

And now, in a hyper-individualised contemporary society with intensified focus on the self, personal choice, and individual identity, and new kinds of collective identity, the tragedies and dilemmas of Napoleon and Joséphine, once the purview of the exceptional or the elite, have become democratized, in broader societal phenomena such as influencer culture, culture wars, and moral polarization. The public negotiation of identity, the tension between personal ambition and societal expectations, and the moral complexities of individual action are now played out in the everyday lives of individuals across society, amplified by digital platforms and the mass media.

While Enlightenment thinkers anticipated a stable, just, democratic, prosperous, and progressive modern society based on human reason, the reality is that new kinds of crisis, contradictions and conflicts emerge.